- (1.)This Rule was issued on an application under section 491 of the Criminal Procedure Code assigned to this Bench for hearing by the Chief Justice. The application is filed by the detenu, Methai Lal Gora, praying for a writ and/or order and/or direction in the nature of habeas corpus and is directed against the District Magistrates, 24-Parganas: the Superintendent, Dum Dum Central Jail; the State of West Bengal through the Secretary, Home Department. Government of West Bengal and the Union of India, through the Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi.
(2.)The applicant before us has been detained under section 3(1) (a) (ii) of the Maintenance of Internal Security Act, 1971 (Act XXVI of 1971), by order No. KM 101/74 dated 6. 3. 1974, passed by the District Magistrate, 24-Parganas "with a view to preventing him from acting in any way prejudicial to the maintenance of public order". He was arrested on the 15th March, 1974 when the ground of detention was served on him and he was directed to be detained in the Dum Dum Central Jail. Leaving out the prefatory and descriptive portion, the ground of detention may be set out as under: -
"On 27.12.73 at about 18.35 hours you along with your associates, being armed with pipe-gun, bomb and sword, raided upon one Sri Hiranmoy Chowdhury, s/o. Jahar Choudhury of Sadhana Road, P. S. Dum Dum in front of the main gate of Biri & Co. on Dakindar Main Road as he protested against your anti-social activities. You also exploded bombs and broke some doors of shops. Those violent activities of yours and your associate created a havoc there and the normal flow of life was suspended there for the time being. Thus you acted in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order". The ground of detention as well as the order detention are annexed to the petition being marked as annexure "A".

(3.)On prayers made on behalf of the detenu at the time when the Rule was issued, the matter was directed to come up for hearing as an application for bail on a subsequent date upon service of the copies of the application on the respondents and it was ultimately directed on the 11th April, 1974 that the Rule will come up for hearing expeditiously. An affidavit-in-opposition affirmed on the 29th, May 1974 by Sri. Bimal Ranjan Chakravarty, District Magistrate, 24 Parganas, was filed on behalf of the respondents; and a supplementary affidavit affirmed by Sri Sheo Pujan Gore on the 10th June, 1974 and another supplementary affidavit affirmed on the 6th July, 1974 were filed on behalf of the detenu-petitioner.